[RFC] Handwavium Law in the US

[Bob Schroeck]

M Fnord wrote:

---

Do not do this again. Keep your cutsey political insults in the Politics forum, if you must. If you cannot talk like a halfway mature individual then you will be asked to leave.

As board owner and admin, I fully support any decision M Fnord may make in this situation. 
You really, really need to understand something, Richardson:  Fenspace is a collective -- it is not a sandbox we've been building in anticipation of your heralded arrival, upon which you will grace us with your perfect specialness, it is a community creation with give-and-take on all sides.  However, you seem very intent on conquering the Fenspace project and turning it into your personal domain following your personal vision.  Sorry, no.  Not even Mal gets to do that, not any more.  Everyone who joined the Collective signed on knowing the base rules that governed the project.  You do not get to come in here and insist that those rules must be changed in order to let your divine vision inform Fenspace with your special truth.  Nor do you get to insult people because they call bullshit on you when you try to anyway.  Be a team player, or don't play at all.
-- Bob
---------
Then the horns kicked in...
...and my shoes began to squeak.

[ECSNorway]

Actually, Bob, Mal was talking to -me-, and I apologize to anyone who was actually personally insulted by what I said.

That said, there -is- a US 'daneside presence in space. We've established that they're part of the colonization of the Moon, that many corporations are helping build orbital industry (Rockhounds sells more Space Rocks to 'daneside corporations who want instant space stations than anyone else, 2/3 of their first dozen went there). The US -military- presence was dominated by, and crippled by, the USAF/TSAB's bureaucratic morass for more than a decade. That said, we know there's a Navy base out in the asteroid belt, there's at least one converted sub running around (and rumors of more), and the TSAB's operations are being taken over by SOMEBODY. (Possibly in part, at least, the Artemis project, which has a lot of ex-NASA people. Possibly not. DARPA loves them their Sekrits.)

Are they trying to take over? Not really. First off, they signed a treaty - and ratified it - saying that they recognized the Convention as a sovereign nation. They actually -did- participate in the Boskone war, Stingray was in a few scraps, and a wing of fighters out of the TSAB got mixed up a few times, too. Secondly, if they did, they know the Convention would -fight- it, and they don't -know- what kind of superweapons may be out there.
Are they -prepared- to fight if they need to? Are there assets, weapons projects, and who knows what else, scattered around the US, the globe, the solar system, in case some Fenspacer gets a wild hair up his ass and starts dropping rocks on Peoria or New Jersey? Yes.
Are they interested in taking up the herding-cats-full-time job it would be to actually -run- what the Convention seems to be handling just fine? Not at this moment. "This is not the correct juncture for that sort of opportunity, ma'am."
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.

[Ross Van Loan]

The 'little guy' rising to prominence is there : the character arc, once completed, of the Shegomania story will take the once would-be weekend Fenster to a position of Defender of the Fen...albeit in ways & manners more Douglas Addams than G.R.R. Martin. His motivation for the quest up the power-tree will have almost nothing to do with power perks, although he will appreciate the four star hotel & VIP hospitality thing : his drive will be to protect Fen from becoming dire, dull & depraved. Fen is supposed to be Fans in Spaaaacceee! Fun is the watchword that he will inform all that he will has and will do.

[Terrace]

Some people get watched as a matter of procedure by multiple law enforcement groups, like the open character I created, Cerrate Barton. He moved to Mars in 2014 and started building the Gundam Heavyarms at Marsbase Sara. Numerous groups keep an eye on him, simply because of the potential destructive power his Mecha wields, but all of their data on him indicates he really just built it out of fanboyish desire. He's not an idiot, though. The thing's weapons are locked against unauthorized users using every method he can think of. Genetic locks, fingerprint scanning, an electronic key that's broadcast over a few inches from a transmitter stored in his cybernetic hand, the works. He rarely even buys ammo for the thing.

They label him as "eccentric, but mostly harmless," but keep an eye on him anyway in case that changes.

[Rajvik]

you know guys, i was just rereading the last couple of pages and am willing to make a few changes as per some suggestions. There will be a FCS Werewolf, but as was suggested somewhat earlier she wont be a former US military ship, i'll find an appropriate cargo vessel and convert it. I'm still going to sell Bell Engines the designs for a (hardtech) hydrogen jet turbine and turboshaft so that my character has the cash to buy the afformentioned cargo ship as well as the blueprints for the F-4 Phantom II which is what I plan to base the initial F-57B's that i want to field from. A lot of this is going to require working with others to build things, but its all going to GJ so i doubt there would be much fuss. Your comments are appreciated
 

[Tennie]

Something else to consider would be the procurement problems that the U.S. military has been facing for a good while now.

For example, take the F-35 Joint Strike fighter program: originally, it was projected to start coming into service sometime around 2010; however numerous delays (many of which seem to stem from a number of engineering and political issues) have meant that only a few have actually made it into service (and only of the -A model that's intended for the Air Force; the -B and -C models for, respectively, the Marine Corps and the Navy, are apparently proving to be the "problem children", so to speak, of the program.

Now, with this and other examples in mind, it made me think: part of me thinks that the addition of handwavium could potentially ease at least some of the procurement troubles; however, another part of me thinks that, at least in some respects, handwavium could make procurement even more difficult than it current is.

To go back to the JSF example that I mentioned: potentially, the addition of handwavium to select areas of the F-35's design could correct for some of the current deficiencies in the design; for example, a properly 'waved drive could alleviate or even completely negate some of the aircraft's performance issues.  On the other hand, certain "known" properties of handwavium (for given definitions of "known", at any rate) may end up compensating negatively to these positive boosts; for example, imagine having to deal with AIs that don't want to take part in certain military operations, even when forced to.  In addition, the Slapstick Effect will have to be dealt with; perhaps the best way to do that might be making sure that none of the ordnance comes into contact with any quantities of handwavium, which is likely to become easier said than done.

Of course, these are just my thoughts; if there are any that you want to add, feel free to do so.  I might not necessarily agree with them, but I'll at least be willing to hear them out nevertheless.

[LynnInDenver]

As an added note regarding military procurement and handwavium to solve it... it's quite likely that the sort that makes a good hardtech military engineering designer makes for a really poor Handwavium user... if they can use it AT ALL. At best, the quirks that result, both on a "all of that type" and "individual example of that type" basis, would probably drive resource management personnel absolutely bonkers.
--

"You know how parents tell you everything's going to fine, but you know they're lying to make you feel better? Everything's going to be fine." - The Doctor

[Rajvik]

This is a bump for the folks discussing wavium law in the wake of the treaty of titan for citd
 

[Bob Schroeck]

And I reread the entire thread upon that bump. There're still a couple things from the Wiki that weren't implemented in the timeline in the first post. Maybe we should assemble everything and put a new timeline up at this point in the thread?
-- Bob
---------
Then the horns kicked in...
...and my shoes began to squeak.

[robkelk]

That's an excellent idea, which I will be happy to leave to someone else to implement.

(If I keep doing the consolidation and editing tasks, I'll never have time to actually write... Somebody else has to take at least part of that load.)
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[LilFluff]

JFerio wrote:

---

After knowledge of the Catgirling Machine became public, a law was passed in 2013 regarding "nonconsensual Handwavium-induced biomods". Rammed through the system, most people had no problem with the idea that it should be an assault crime... the problem people tend to have with it was that it was so broadly written that a completely accidental biomod could wind up with serious criminal charges filed against a handwavium user.

In 2017, a case came before the Supreme Court regarding the broad stroke of the law, charges having been brought by the American parents of a college student caught in a completely accidental biomod when the University lab she was at in England had an unforseeable containment failure. She was insistent that it was an accident, there's no need to go to all the trouble, and she actually liked her biomod, but her parents had been in a protracted appeals fight with the university over what the parents saw as their criminal liability. The Supreme Court ruled that the law was overly vague, and that criminal charges for something that was a complete accident out of anyone's control was a bit much, thank you very much.

Jumping back to handwavium law, would the Catgirl Act be so broadly and
poorly written that Rhett could have charges brought against himself
over his own accidental biomodding of himself?
Timewise I'm leaning towards the mid-to-late 20-teens for when Curiosity Biomodded the Rhett takes place. (He really, really should have known to handle the wave better)
-----

Will the transhumanist future have catgirls? Does Japan still exist? Well, there is your answer.

[Dartz]

I just realised something re-reading that...

What jurisdiction would an American court have over an English university?
________________________________
--m(^0^)m-- Wot, no sig?

[DeputyJones]

I'm still wondering how whoever ordered the USAF fighter to fire on what I'm pretty sure was still considered a hostage situation in regards to Marci/Shuko and Wave Convoy got away with it. At the very least any civilian person ordering it would be up political shit creek and any military officer would find out what at least some of the more level-headed soldiers though even if it did get them some sort of punishment detail/court marshal - to say anything if the person in the fighter didn't know what he was potentially shooting at and decided to introduce said moron to what troops in Vietnam did to certain REMFs who stepped over any one of certain lines.
Or Marci/Shuko's father for trying to kill her and SUCEEDING in at least killing Wave's human body, for that matter. Even if the asshole got away with the killing part by a lawyer pointing at Wave in his new body, shouldn't he still have 'attempted murder' and 'firing a weapon in a residential neighborhood' charges?

[robkelk]

I just realised something re-reading that...

What jurisdiction would an American court have over an English university?

If the affected person was an American citizen, they could claim jurisdiction over that person. (It's much like how in our timeline the Canadian government can prosecute Canadian citizens who have sex with minors while in countries where that either isn't illegal or isn't reported - at least, that's how I see it.)

Whether they could make it stick is another matter entirely.
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[robkelk]

Jumping back to handwavium law, would the Catgirl Act be so broadly and poorly written that Rhett could have charges brought against himself over his own accidental biomodding of himself?

Timewise I'm leaning towards the mid-to-late 20-teens for when Curiosity Biomodded the Rhett takes place. (He really, really should have known to handle the wave better)

Any lawyer can bring any suit against anyone - but smart lawyers know when to not try. Mid-to-late 2010s... I'd say the smart lawyers would know better than to try this one.
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[LilFluff]

Dartz wrote:

---

I just realised something re-reading that...

What jurisdiction would an American court have over an English university?

Complicated jurisdiction?
There is precedent for a country to bring charges against one of their own citizens who travel abroad and commit an act that the home country considers a crime, even if it is legal in the foreign country (mainly I'm aware of sex tourism laws, consider Norway which in 2009 passed a law stricter than the US's sex tourism laws, hiring a prostitute even where it is legal and everyone is an adult can result in a fine or months in jail if you are a Norwegian citizen).
As I understand it in cases like the example quoted, normally the home country would encourage the foreign country to investigate and prosecute (for wide ranging definitions of 'encourage'). There does seem to be precedent for putting terrorists on trial for actions that harm citizens or property of citizens even when the acts take place outside the country that the trial is taking place in; but my understanding is that this usually involved convincing the country the act occurred in to agree to the trial taking place. But my guess would be that the law in question provided provisions similar to those used against sexual tourism, and provided both criminal elements as well as a right to bring a civil case to allow the victim to have the one responsible pay restitution to cover all the expenses they'll now face (needing to buy customized clothing, unknown future medical complications, increased security concerns to deal with anti-wave harassment, etc).
If the law was passed in a hurry who wants to guess that the writing process likely involved repeated use of cutting and pasting from existing laws, with lots of "replace all" used to change terms in the original laws to variations on, "involuntary biomodification." That could result in a section from an anti-sex-tourism law showing up and stating that the act didn't have to occur in the US for the law to cover it. Most likely it would be trying to say that a US citizen could be charged if they traveled to another country, involuntarily biomodded someone there, and then returned to the US. But if the whole thing was written poorly a lawyer might look at it and say, "Huh, well going by the wording as-is as long as one party involved is a US resident or citizen..."
At first glance if the university didn't have any US sites or money held in US banks you might figure they'd shrug and say, "Yeah, good luck collecting on whatever award the court gives you." But if they had any kind of joint project with a US university or were members of a consortium with a US presence they'd likely want to protect those. Also, if they didn't fight the case chances are the family could pretty much win by default (so long as the law at least provided a chance they could win if it had been contested, if the law flat out did not provide any room for the family to bring a complaint they judge would likely throw out the case -- why should he or she waste their time on a totally invalid complaint). If the university had ruling against it that could be troublesome if they ever wanted to make purchases from a US company, send representatives to an event in the US, or simply didn't want to deal with the authorities showing up from time to time, "Say, Oxford had another shipment delayed while US Customs ensured none of it was going to you. Do you think you could clear that case up?"
Of course the same slapdash manner of putting the bill together in a hurry would likely be part of what would result in the Supreme Court later throwing it out. Likely the reason wouldn't be that it allowed bringing charges against someone over an accident (that's a big reason for having insurance, you can be liable for the results of an accident, generally on the theory that you should have been aware that accidents can happen and taken steps to reduce the risk and to be prepared to deal with one happening if the odds didn't work out in your favor). I'd likely guess that the court either ruled that the law had irreconcilable internal contradictions, such that it couldn't be fixed by saying, "Paragraph 5 is bad, it's null and void and if congress wants what paragraph 5 was trying to do it needs to write a valid replacement," or the court deciding it didn't like whatever provision allowed to prosecuting foreign acts (and watch as law students are provided with essay material for decades to come by the majority and minority opinions and the implications for other laws -- no matter how much, "No, no, a thousand times no, this ruling has no precedent on any other law, especially the sex tourism laws, we're only striking down this law," shows up in the rulings).
tl;dr? 1: Does the family have money to pay for lawyers? 2: Does the university have *anything* in the US that could be seized? 3: Yeah, this would probably involve politics at some point. Yay politics. :p
-----

Will the transhumanist future have catgirls? Does Japan still exist? Well, there is your answer.

[Foxboy]

If anything, have the Junior Senator from New Hampshire be champing at the bit. He's at the end of his first term in office and he got in on a Fen Fear and Smear ticket.
''We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat
them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.''

-- James Nicoll

[ECSNorway]

Bumping this thread to the front page for reference while Bob works on the Land Theft Prevention Act article.
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.

[Bob Schroeck]

Good idea, Norway. It also ties in nicely -- at least some of it -- to the Worst Case Scenario thread.
EDIT:  Oh, and back to the original purpose of the thread -- the Subversive Literature Act of 2009 would certainly drop nicely into the legal timeline, as fragmentary and sketchy the information about it may be at this time.
-- Bob
---------
Then the horns kicked in...
...and my shoes began to squeak.